Measuring unmet need for contraception as a point prevalence

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background This study proposes a framework to address conceptual concerns with the standard indicator of unmet need for contraception. We define new point prevalence measures of current status (CS) unmet need and CS unmet demand, by linking contraceptive behaviours to pregnancy exposure and to women's future contraceptive intentions. We explore the difference between standard and CS unmet need and estimate the proportion of women with CS unmet demand, who may be more likely to adopt contraception. Methods We use Demographic and Health Survey data from 46 low-income and middle-income countries released between 2010 and 2018. We assess differences in women's classification between standard and CS unmet need indicators and estimate the percentage of women with CS unmet demand for contraception, defined as the percentage of women with CS unmet need who intend to use contraception in the future. Findings We find substantial country-level differences between standard and CS estimates of unmet need, ranging from -8.3% points in Niger to +11.1% points in Nepal. The average predictive value of the standard measure across the 46 countries for identifying prevalent cases of unmet need is 53%. Regardless of indicator (standard or CS), only half of women with unmet need intend to use contraception. Interpretation The results of this study suggest that the standard measure of unmet need has low predictive value in identifying women with current unmet need. Thus, the standard indicator does not reflect a prevalence estimate of unmet need.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numbere001581
JournalBMJ Global Health
Volume4
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2019

Fingerprint

Contraception
Contraception Behavior
Niger
Nepal
Contraceptive Agents
Demography
Pregnancy

Keywords

  • contraceptive behaviors
  • contraceptive intentions
  • demographic and health surveys
  • unmet need for family planning

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Measuring unmet need for contraception as a point prevalence. / Moreau, Caroline; Shankar, Mridula; Helleringer, Stephane; Becker, Stanley.

In: BMJ Global Health, Vol. 4, No. 4, e001581, 01.08.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{6d65145222a6492da8e54be510346f3f,
title = "Measuring unmet need for contraception as a point prevalence",
abstract = "Background This study proposes a framework to address conceptual concerns with the standard indicator of unmet need for contraception. We define new point prevalence measures of current status (CS) unmet need and CS unmet demand, by linking contraceptive behaviours to pregnancy exposure and to women's future contraceptive intentions. We explore the difference between standard and CS unmet need and estimate the proportion of women with CS unmet demand, who may be more likely to adopt contraception. Methods We use Demographic and Health Survey data from 46 low-income and middle-income countries released between 2010 and 2018. We assess differences in women's classification between standard and CS unmet need indicators and estimate the percentage of women with CS unmet demand for contraception, defined as the percentage of women with CS unmet need who intend to use contraception in the future. Findings We find substantial country-level differences between standard and CS estimates of unmet need, ranging from -8.3{\%} points in Niger to +11.1{\%} points in Nepal. The average predictive value of the standard measure across the 46 countries for identifying prevalent cases of unmet need is 53{\%}. Regardless of indicator (standard or CS), only half of women with unmet need intend to use contraception. Interpretation The results of this study suggest that the standard measure of unmet need has low predictive value in identifying women with current unmet need. Thus, the standard indicator does not reflect a prevalence estimate of unmet need.",
keywords = "contraceptive behaviors, contraceptive intentions, demographic and health surveys, unmet need for family planning",
author = "Caroline Moreau and Mridula Shankar and Stephane Helleringer and Stanley Becker",
year = "2019",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1136/bmjgh-2019-001581",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "4",
journal = "BMJ Global Health",
issn = "2059-7908",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Measuring unmet need for contraception as a point prevalence

AU - Moreau, Caroline

AU - Shankar, Mridula

AU - Helleringer, Stephane

AU - Becker, Stanley

PY - 2019/8/1

Y1 - 2019/8/1

N2 - Background This study proposes a framework to address conceptual concerns with the standard indicator of unmet need for contraception. We define new point prevalence measures of current status (CS) unmet need and CS unmet demand, by linking contraceptive behaviours to pregnancy exposure and to women's future contraceptive intentions. We explore the difference between standard and CS unmet need and estimate the proportion of women with CS unmet demand, who may be more likely to adopt contraception. Methods We use Demographic and Health Survey data from 46 low-income and middle-income countries released between 2010 and 2018. We assess differences in women's classification between standard and CS unmet need indicators and estimate the percentage of women with CS unmet demand for contraception, defined as the percentage of women with CS unmet need who intend to use contraception in the future. Findings We find substantial country-level differences between standard and CS estimates of unmet need, ranging from -8.3% points in Niger to +11.1% points in Nepal. The average predictive value of the standard measure across the 46 countries for identifying prevalent cases of unmet need is 53%. Regardless of indicator (standard or CS), only half of women with unmet need intend to use contraception. Interpretation The results of this study suggest that the standard measure of unmet need has low predictive value in identifying women with current unmet need. Thus, the standard indicator does not reflect a prevalence estimate of unmet need.

AB - Background This study proposes a framework to address conceptual concerns with the standard indicator of unmet need for contraception. We define new point prevalence measures of current status (CS) unmet need and CS unmet demand, by linking contraceptive behaviours to pregnancy exposure and to women's future contraceptive intentions. We explore the difference between standard and CS unmet need and estimate the proportion of women with CS unmet demand, who may be more likely to adopt contraception. Methods We use Demographic and Health Survey data from 46 low-income and middle-income countries released between 2010 and 2018. We assess differences in women's classification between standard and CS unmet need indicators and estimate the percentage of women with CS unmet demand for contraception, defined as the percentage of women with CS unmet need who intend to use contraception in the future. Findings We find substantial country-level differences between standard and CS estimates of unmet need, ranging from -8.3% points in Niger to +11.1% points in Nepal. The average predictive value of the standard measure across the 46 countries for identifying prevalent cases of unmet need is 53%. Regardless of indicator (standard or CS), only half of women with unmet need intend to use contraception. Interpretation The results of this study suggest that the standard measure of unmet need has low predictive value in identifying women with current unmet need. Thus, the standard indicator does not reflect a prevalence estimate of unmet need.

KW - contraceptive behaviors

KW - contraceptive intentions

KW - demographic and health surveys

KW - unmet need for family planning

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85071618036&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85071618036&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/bmjgh-2019-001581

DO - 10.1136/bmjgh-2019-001581

M3 - Article

C2 - 31543991

AN - SCOPUS:85071618036

VL - 4

JO - BMJ Global Health

JF - BMJ Global Health

SN - 2059-7908

IS - 4

M1 - e001581

ER -